Beckerserve
Legend
Does she have a better bite?Sometimes, the questions are so insane, that I have to go with the most insane answer. If you asked me who's better at boxing, peak Tyson, or my wife, I'd pick my wife.
Does she have a better bite?Sometimes, the questions are so insane, that I have to go with the most insane answer. If you asked me who's better at boxing, peak Tyson, or my wife, I'd pick my wife.
That's how most feel about RAFA's USOs, hehesampras will always be remembered for his fighting victories at the us open, not for stealing slams when nobody is watching........
Does she have a better bite?
I mean ... a good attorney never asks a he doesn’t know the answer to.look at that poll result, fraudsters on a voting spree.........acting like it is not 5-4 but 15-4.........so insecure as usual........
Federer's dominance of the US Open was so great that when he was beaten it was not only a huge shock, but the trophy has since been cursed to never be won in consecutive years by the same player.
The title of "Men's US Open Singles Champion" has taken on the same meaning as the title of "Defence Against the Dark Arts Professor" at Hogwarts.
I am USO so here are my two cents...
After watching Nadal demolish PCB today (The man who lead Djokovic 6-5 with a break and almost won his SF), I have a feeling that Nadal would have won this year’s USO. But obviously he didn’t want to over play.
As for the question itself, Federer obviously has more titles so one has to vote for him. He was dominant for 5 years in a row, but Nadal’s wins have a 10-year longevity so it’s a strength too. Despite missing it a few years, it feels that he’s been a factor there for a long time including this year had he played.
Both are two of the biggest champions at the USO, and believe me if anyone knows I do.
Doubt it. He would've needed Djokovic to get defaulted just like Thiem and the rest of the field needed it.
Nadal at the USO has performed better in finals including against Djokovic. In tournaments like the USO and Canada he plays some of his best hardcourt tennis. Frankly I wasn’t impressed that much by Djokovic’s form in Cincinnati barely beating Raonic and Bautista and then at the USO losing a set to Edmund and then already in trouble against PCB. Djokovic could have still lost in one of his matches. I guess it’s still early to judge Nadal’s form but based on today I think he has worked very hard in the off-season and could have done very well at the USO. I guess we’ll see more of him in the next few days...
Yet we're supposed to rate Nadal's form? He didn't even play. Besides that, he hasn't beaten Djokovic on a HC in 7 years. Safe to say he would've needed an upset like he got in 2019, and with no Wawrinka I'm not sure he would've gotten one.
It doesn’t matter, even if you want to consider Djokovic as the favourite despite him often under performing at the USO, the least you can do is put Nadal as the second favourite.
The point is even in 2020 Nadal would be still a big contender at the USO since he won it last year while Federer hasn’t since 2008. I’m just saying that Nadal at the USO has been a force for many years now and that both him and Federer are some of USO’s greatest champions despite their different journey.
Federer dominated 2000-2009 decade winning 5 in a row in that time. Nadal owned the event 2010-2019 winning 4 titles in 8 attempts in that decade. Who is better? 5 is more than 4. So Federer has to have the vote. Best 3 US Open players are Sampras Federer and Connors with Nadal 4th.
Fair point. Love McEnroe so happy to have him on that illustrious list. Borg on 0 titles baffles me.Nadal is tied with McEnroe at 4 USO, he doesn't sit at 4th place by himself.
Awesome post and well informed. I would be really interested if you would list your top 8 USO champions in order. Mine is as follows:In all seriousness, Federer had a truly unique run at the USO during the Open Era.
1. Fed's 5 straight titles and 6 straight finals is truly amazing.
2. Fed's 14 straight wins vs the top 10 is absolutely ridiculous. Federer only lost 7 sets during that insane 14 match streak vs the top 10 while dishing out 7 baked goods(4 break sticks and 3 bagels). This is flat-out destruction of the top 10.
3+ USO champions with the most wins vs top-10 players
1. Lendl 17-8
2. Sampras 16-5
2. Federer 16-6
4. Djoker 12-7
5. McEnroe 9-4
6. Nadal 7-5
6. Connors 7-8
As far as competition goes, I think that Lendl had the toughest competition. He faced Connors(5 time winner) and McEnroe(4 time winner) several times. He also faced Edberg(2 time winner), along with other winners(Agassi, Wilander, Becker).
Fair point. Love McEnroe so happy to have him on that illustrious list. Borg on 0 titles baffles me.
If he had stuck around for a little while longer, he could have had a better shot.It is what it is, he just couldn't past peak Connors and then peak McEnroe there. Shame really, felt he deserved at least one.
If he had stuck around for a little while longer, he could have had a better shot.
Wonder how much the crowd played apart. In those days NY crowd was mad and very close to the court. You are right he deserved one. What a player. What a guy.It is what it is, he just couldn't past peak Connors and then peak McEnroe there. Shame really, felt he deserved at least one.
Awesome post and well informed. I would be really interested if you would list your top 8 USO champions in order. Mine is as follows:
1. Sampras
2. Federer
3. Connors
4. Nadal
5. Mcenroe
6. Lendl
7. Djokovic
8. Edberg.
Went for Sampras top as to win it as youngest winner ever then 12 years later is pretty damn special and probably just trumps 5 in a row. And those matches with prime Agassi were just unreal.Good list!
Wonder how much the crowd played apart. In those days NY crowd was mad and very close to the court. You are right he deserved one. What a player. What a guy.
Went for Sampras top as to win it as youngest winner ever then 12 years later is pretty damn special and probably just trumps 5 in a row. And those matches with prime Agassi were just unreal.
Yep exactly how it did. Funnily enough Nadal did that last year after winning. Usually the champion stays the next day for photo ops in New York. In those days Flushing was like a zoo. Connors worked that crowd big time.Well, he was the opposite of Connors, who thrived in the NYC energy, Borg couldn't wait to get out of there....Everything used to annoy him about that place, even the lights. If I recall correctly after losing to McEnroe in 1981, he just walked off the court and drove back to the hotel, and got the first plane out....before anyone knew what was going on, Borg was already airborne.
What about Wimbledon? 7 finals 7 won. Personally i give Federer the edge due to 2001 match. Had Sampras won that i would have given it Pete. Not sure why so many do not like Pete. Mind u i still get annoyed over his W record v Becker. Especially 1995 final. I still feel but for a bad fall in 2nd set Becker may have won that match.Yeah, I agree. The fact that even 12 years after his first title he was still able to say "I am again the best at the USO" has a lot of weight. Also the fact that he was American and also his rivalry with Agassi makes people remember him more at the USO than Federer. He also has an extra final. At this point it's one of the very few things that we can rank Sampras over Federer, so let's give him a break!
Yep exactly how it did. Funnily enough Nadal did that last year after winning. Usually the champion stays the next day for photo ops in New York. In those days Flushing was like a zoo. Connors worked that crowd big time.
And back then travel was more ardous and i suspect he didnt like that side of things as well.The thing is Borg was loved also, but the personality of the USO just didn't gel with his own personality. He thrived in Europe it was better suited to him.
What about Wimbledon? 7 finals 7 won. Personally i give Federer the edge due to 2001 match. Had Sampras won that i would have given it Pete. Not sure why so many do not like Pete. Mind u i still get annoyed over his W record v Becker. Especially 1995 final. I still feel but for a bad fall in 2nd set Becker may have won that match.
And back then travel was more ardous and i suspect he didnt like that side of things as well.
If Sampras had played on he would have been losing finals to Federer like Federer is to Djokovic now. Age is a factor between all time greats. Less of an issue v a Zverev or tsitsipas!!I don't think the 2001 match was very important... It was between 2 completely different generations and also it could have gone either way. It’s not as if Sampras knew that Federer was going to become an all-time great and that this match was going to eventually have a certain meaning.
Federer obviously has an extra title and several more finals, but the fact that Federer lost all his 3 finals to Djokovic is definitely a bad look. Sampras when he made the final had that unbeatable aura. But maybe if Sampras had played up until his late 30s he would have lost many finals too so we can’t hold it against Federer, he is definitely still at #1 for Wimbledon.
and 98More finals and probably robbed of a couple by injury too (1994/1999).
and 98
Well the 97 loss was legit. But he probably would have snagged at least 1-2 of 94/98/99.hypothetical pete wins 8 straight USO titles?
Bizarre line of questioning, to be sure.The fact that this garbage thread has gone on for almost 3 pages tells you everything you need to know about TTW.
Federer has 1 more title despite significantly tougher draws.
Matches vs Djokovic:
Federer 6
Nadal 3
| | | | | | | | | | | |
TOTALS | Match | Tiebreak | Ace% | 1stIn | 1st% | 2nd% | Hld% | SPW | Brk% | RPW | TPW | DR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[x] Time Span: 04-Jan-2010... | 7-2 (78%) | 3-2 (60%) | 3.1% | 66.2% | 69.1% | 53.7% | 77.7% | 63.9% | 26.0% | 40.1% | 51.7% | 1.11 |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
TOTALS | Match | Tiebreak | Ace% | 1stIn | 1st% | 2nd% | Hld% | SPW | Brk% | RPW | TPW | DR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[x] Time Span: 19-Jan-2004... | 15-4 (79%) | 10-4 (71%) | 9.8% | 60.5% | 75.0% | 53.7% | 84.7% | 66.6% | 26.0% | 39.0% | 52.9% | 1.17 |
I'm not sure why 1 match in Pete's post-prime and Fed's pre-prime counts for more than things like Federer having an extra title and bundle of runner-up plates, but whatever floats your boat.What about Wimbledon? 7 finals 7 won. Personally i give Federer the edge due to 2001 match. Had Sampras won that i would have given it Pete. Not sure why so many do not like Pete. Mind u i still get annoyed over his W record v Becker. Especially 1995 final. I still feel but for a bad fall in 2nd set Becker may have won that match.
TTW was a mistakeNadal has literally nothing in his favour here. Can't even play the competition card. Ban thread, delete OP.